Finally got back in town and unboxed the Dell. Enjoy
https://picasaweb.google.com/102432...&authkey=Gv1sRgCLKZqIuB5dOgDQ&feat=directlink
https://picasaweb.google.com/102432...&authkey=Gv1sRgCLKZqIuB5dOgDQ&feat=directlink
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
did you try 200% resolution scale in Bf4 ?
did you try 200% resolution scale in Bf4 ?
It hardly matters with a 32" screen and that high of resolution. And it's a trade off, you may gain more FOV in games, but you also lose viewing space vertically when looking at documents, webpages, etc.
Wrong, you actually gain lots of vertical viewing space. Text is based on lines and pixels per line. For 2d applications you will have more vertical viewing room on a 4k panel as the resolution is much higher vertically compared to a paltry 1200 vertical on a typical 16 x 10 display.
I recommend staying away from this display or any other 4K display - at least for now. I went through 3 displays before I said screw it.
http://en.community.dell.com/support-forums/peripherals/f/3529/t/19535104.aspx
However, I will say that physically speaking the UP3214Q is quite nice and the OSD is simply excellent. Dell also provides a nice tool called Dell Display Manager, which while buggy for me while in MST mode, was awesome, when it worked correctly, for controlling various features of the display from within Windows.
Wrong, you actually gain lots of vertical viewing space. Text is based on lines and pixels per line. For 2d applications you will have more vertical viewing room on a 4k panel as the resolution is much higher vertically compared to a paltry 1200 vertical on a typical 16 x 10 display.
You completely misunderstood what I said. Please reread it. I said nothing about a 1920x1200. I was talking about 16:10 compared to 16:9 on a 4k ppanel. You essentially agreed with me by calling me wrong lol.
No idea why you would want a 16:10 monitor...
For desktop real estate, 2160 vertical pixels is A LOT(I actually have a 4K monitor). 3840x2400 would, of course, be 10% more real estate, but that's really all it is, a small incremental improvement. And it comes with even higher gpu requirements in games, which is a direct loss of framerate while also losing field of view, not gaining! 16:10 is horrible for games, and a minor improvement in real estate.
It hardly matters with a 32" screen and that high of resolution. And it's a trade off, you may gain more FOV in games, but you also lose viewing space vertically when looking at documents, webpages, etc.
Wrong again, nothing you said was an indication of 4k panel discussion, just aspect ratios. Feel free to continue backpedaling for some weird reason if you want though.
What are you talking about dude? Why am I feeding you again?
A 24" 4k is really too small of a physical screen to read documents unless your sitting three inches from the scree....but a 24" is primarily used for graphics and video applications
I recommend staying away from this display or any other 4K display - at least for now. I went through 3 displays before I said screw it.
http://en.community.dell.com/support-forums/peripherals/f/3529/t/19535104.aspx
However, I will say that physically speaking the UP3214Q is quite nice and the OSD is simply excellent. Dell also provides a nice tool called Dell Display Manager, which while buggy for me while in MST mode, was awesome, when it worked correctly, for controlling various features of the display from within Windows.
You are rantng about how 4k presents a lower amount of desktop information because you claim it restricts your vertical field of view when working on documents, which is completely wrong and shows no understanding of display technology whatsoever. Quoting some other random guy's post that wasn't in context to yours doesn't do anything for your argument, and you then quote yourself making the incorrect argument in the first place...... Why? You make little sense to the rest of us.
He was talking about the difference between 16:9 and 16:10 on a 4K monitor. He posted that other guy's quote because that is the post he was directly responding to.
I am dying to get my hands on a 28" Dell or 39" Asus 4k monitor because those will make my work productivity soooooo much better. I have done almost every multimonitor setup on the face of the planet and I HATE THEM. I JUST WANT ONE JUMBO 4k display and have been throwing cash and credit cards at my paltry Eizo FG2421 in the hopes that one will come in the mail.
But when you increase resolution you need to increase DPI so you can read text so are you really getting much more stuff on screen?
Only if you feel restricted to keeping text the same size as on a ~95 dpi monitor. If you have 20/20 vision, you shouldn't feel any need for this, because text is easy to read with 20/20 vision at half the size it is on regular monitors, if not even smaller.
Many people sit way too far away from their monitors, though, which is a different (but related) problem.
Well, I have had a 30" monitor for years, I sit about 2 feet away, and there is no way I can read text without increasing the font size or zooming in on my browser. Maybe I need new glasses, I am near sighted.
It's a common complaint. I run my Asus PQ321 without scaling though and have no issues, and my vision is 20/30 when I'm normally sitting at my computer, and you'll find people on this forum who manage at even higher dpis without trouble.
24" without scaling correction would definitely be too small for me, and I think I would want 125% at 28", but in general, I have way way more desktop real estate on my 32" 3840x2160 than on any monitor I've previously seen or owned, including 27/30" types.
20/30 vision, 3840x2160 resolution, NO SCALING, and you can read text easily? How cloose do you sit?
Only if you feel restricted to keeping text the same size as on a ~95 dpi monitor. If you have 20/20 vision, you shouldn't feel any need for this, because text is easy to read with 20/20 vision at half the size it is on regular monitors, if not even smaller.
Many people sit way too far away from their monitors, though, which is a different (but related) problem.
20-26 inches depending on head and seat position... towards the closer end when I'm really intent on working/reading text, and further away when gaming. I took out a measuring tape and actually measured (eye level to top of screen).
Also, I just noticed that I actually have negative zoom set in this forum so text on this forum is actually two zoom steps smaller than the default... oops. So yes, no problems reading standard sized text at 140dpi for me with 20/30 vision.
I had lasik (going to get a touch-up soon) but I have about 1 diopter of astigmatism even after lasik which nets me about 20/30 vision without glasses ( usually wear glasses to correct the astigmatism until I get a touch-up).
Anyway at 20/30 I can still work with 75 DPI X (smaller fonts than 96 DPI windows) and 10 point fonts at 3840x2400 but that is on a 22 inch monitor from about 2-2.25 feet away. and because I am 20/30-ish with the astigmatism it isn't super clear and can sometimes be a little hard to make out but with correction I have absolutely 0 problems up to 3 feet away.
I wonder if the issue is really that people can't read it and its really a problem (I really don't think my vision is THAT fr superior than a lot of people) or is it people are just accustomed to larger text?
The reason I wonder is pretty much everyone in my family (sister and father) use 4k displays. My dad was starting to have issues with his 22 inch 4k due to even with reading glasses the focal point is getting smaller and smaller and finally switched to 4k 39 inch seiki's recently (He is 55 years old) but we have all been using high resolution displays for a lot of years.
In 1997 iish (when I was 12) I was running 1600x1200 on a 17 inch CRT. By the time I was 15 (2000) I was doing 2560x1920 on a 22 inch CRT (@54 Hz until later graphics cards bumped the ramdac from 350 -> 400 Mhz which then I was able to do 63 Hz).
In 2006 got my first LCD which was the 30 inch dell 3007WFP. The clarity/size improvement was apprecaited. Until then all LCD's were so much lower resolution than my CRT that I could just not switch. Very shotly after (a few months) I got my first 22 inch 4k display and have pretty much been using 1440p/1600p or 4k displays since then.
You mean you had a 22" inch 4k display in 2006? How's that even possible? How much did it cost?
IBM T220 has a resolution of 3840x2400 in the early 2000.
I recommend staying away from this display or any other 4K display - at least for now. I went through 3 displays before I said screw it.